Book Em' Danno!


#1 Angry Guy on 03.19.09 at 4:33 pm

SFPD carries Glock sidearms.
What’re ya, ignernt?

#2 Plaintiff Guy on 03.19.09 at 7:25 pm

Whomever, if they come to your house unanounced, they are ill intentioned. Defense is against a home break-in and percieved law enforcement. Keep and hold. It’s the last stand against socialism.

#3 l3wis on 03.20.09 at 6:31 am

AG- Who cares, they never use them anyway.

#4 Ghost of Dude on 03.20.09 at 6:44 am

3. Sure they do. They shoot a dog or two every month.

2. A recent case in Texas says you’re still charged with capital murder. Good luck proving they didn’t anounce themselves – your word against theirs.

#5 Costner on 03.20.09 at 8:20 am

Why is it that anytime there is controversy and a difference of memory of how events transpired, the remote microphone on the officer and/or the video camera in the was somehow turned off?

Personally I think there should be more strict laws about video and audio. It should be managed by a third party to eliminate conflict of interest issues.

That being said, I believe our local law enforcement does a great job. The number of complaints versus number of interactions with the public is very low and Sioux Falls is not known for having issues with police intimidation, corruption, or abuses.

It might just be the one city department that is worth every penny of their budget.

#6 l3wis on 03.20.09 at 8:32 am

I would give them a C+ if I was grading them. I have examples of things they have done that I don’t agree with. They try to create crime to often. I got pulled over for a California stop and didn’t argue with the cop about it and while he was writing the ticket he tried to accuse me of not wearing my seatbelt. I said, “I took it off to get out my ID after I stopped the vehicle.” He said, “No you didn’t, you weren’t wearing it when you rolled through the stop sign.” I started laughing and said, “I have worn my seatbelt religiously for over 15 years, nice try.” He didn’t know what to say, he just grunted and gave me the stop sign violation. Another incident was when I was handcuffed and had my miranda rights read to me, the officer asked if he could ask me questions. I said, “No.” Then he said, “Are you sure?” And I said, “Yeah, I’m sure, you just read me my rights, you can’t ask me questions without a lawyer present.” He had a surprised look on his face and sheepishly said, “okay.” It’s like they depend on people being ignorant of the law to entrap them, that pisses me off. I had no problem admitting guilt in both incidences, but don’t lie on police reports (the arresting officer wrote false accounts on my report, which was revealed in court) and not have the balls to show up to court and back it up. It didn’t affect my fine because I had already admitted guilt, but it pissed me off that he wrote bullshit about the incident. I expect law officers to be fair and honest and to prevent crime not create it. If the PD is that bored in SF, maybe they need to lay off some officers so we can keep them busy.

#7 Ghost of Dude on 03.20.09 at 8:43 am

Sioux Falls is not known for having issues with police intimidation, corruption, or abuses

I know several teenagers (former teenagers now) and at least one lawyer who would disagree with you. However, the officer who was investigated for age profiling now patrols a desk.

It’s like they depend on people being ignorant of the law to entrap them

Makes me wonder how many people sit in jail needlessly.